(01-29-2015 01:52 PM)ken d Wrote: (01-29-2015 01:12 PM)Wedge Wrote: (01-29-2015 01:00 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote: (01-29-2015 11:48 AM)Wedge Wrote: (01-29-2015 10:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote: It has already formed. It's called the Big 12.
That was the idea when the Big 12 was formed, and it did put the Longhorn, Sooner, and Cornhusker football brands under one roof, but it didn't go far enough in addressing the lower population of the "footprint" that was the big issue going forward for the Big 8 and SWC.
And the Big 12, for various reasons, missed the opportunity to expand its population base when replacing the schools that left the conference in the last five years.
If the Big 12 could go back in time, they could address some of the original issues - such as the discontinuation of the OU/NU rivalry. But there were also a few other items that were issues, such as aTm's preference for the SEC. The Big 12 was a good conference - but it was flanked by better ones with big appetites. There have been a number of ideas floated regarding how we could have expanded, but in the end I'm not sure any of them would have helped stave off what has happened, nor is there any guarantee that we could have actually gotten the targets posited even if we wanted to. (For example, the FSU/Clemson grab some hoped for was clearly not going to occur - the only way something like that occurs is if the SEC and B1G pull off a massive strike and leave behind attractive targets from a gutted conference.)
Agreed that the Big 12 had no shot at poaching FSU and Clemson.
The Big 12 did try to get Pittsburgh, and Pitt used that as leverage to get the ACC to invite them.
The Big 12 could have tried an aggressive move at the time Colorado and Nebraska left, to pick up a few or several Big East programs at once (in addition to WVU whom they invited the following year). That would have expanded the footprint into populated states. But maybe ESPN and Fox were not willing to increase the TV dollars enough to make a large expansion look good to the Big 12 presidents. Or maybe they didn't like the idea of shifting the center of gravity in the conference to the east, or maybe they wanted someone else to get the blame for the end of Big East football. Who knows.
I've often wondered what would have happened if, down to 8 teams, the Big 12 had invited WVU, Pitt, Cincinnati and Louisville as a package deal. That's not to denigrate TCU. But the geographic compatibility of those four has a lot of appeal to me. Whether Cincy and Louisville would have appealed to Pitt is a question I can't answer. That might go to how much of their core identity is as an eastern school as opposed to an Ohio Valley school.
And, clearly, such a move would have been the fatal blow to the Big East before the ACC had a chance to deliver it.
If we leave aside the theories that UT (and perhaps OU and KU as well) were trying to avoid expansion to keep options open, that is one of the more intriguing possibilities. I can see a lot of plausible reasons it didn't occur, however.
As has been noted, it leaves open the possibility of one or more of those schools using that offer as leverage to get an invitation elsewhere (as has been speculated (and perhaps confirmed, I just don't recall seeing it) with Pitt), or else just taking their chances on a future invitation to a preferred destination. Even if the Big 12 were to start talks with that group, there's no guarantee it could have been worked out from their side.
There could also have been negative feedback from networks - whether because it would not add enough value in their estimation to the Big 12, or because the networks had other preferred destinations for those schools, it doesn't matter.
There were probably also perception issues. As a league losing high-profile members, there may have been reluctance to bring on "lesser brands".
The Big 12 could also have been over-estimating their chances of landing FSU/Clemson and perhaps others, and thus held back.
There could have been concerns within the Big 12 that those 4 schools coming together would create an instant voting block, in a conference that was already in a cliquish state.
On a related topic, there could have been concerns within the Big 12 North that those additions would keep them away from Texas more often. They probably figure it's easier to draw a kid for the short trip up I-35 than to come from the Ohio Valley, even if the additions would have added new recruiting grounds.
aTm may have had one foot out the door and been playing heavy footsie with the SEC, and thus not cooperated in the potential move, objecting on other grounds officially while continuing back-door conversations with Slive & Co.
As has been pointed out, the conference owns the Big 14 name, so it could have expanded there and had a fresh start. Then even if aTm bolted for the SEC later, we could have added TCU at that point. Missouri would likely still have left if the SEC were particularly voracious for #14, but it's also possible that we'd have done enough to keep them in the conference (and kept a direct bridge to the new eastern frontier).
